Re-red the original post with the CBS link/article on his
Posted By: exact whereabouts at time of Bush's speech. on 2009-01-16
In Reply to: He DID? What channel was it on? - Marmann
At least it wasn't Fox covering it, so you should believe eyewitnesses, shouldn't you?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Original post is not true - see link for truth!
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
By the way, we have not heard peep from the original poster since the quotes she posted were proven to be, at best, grossly inaccurate and completely out of context, and, at worst, downright lies!
I meant to post this link in the original message
Really connects the dots
http://patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-annenberg-foundationobamafactcheckbrady-center-connection/
Please see original post, link for video included..nm
x
post the link only, not the whole article and the link. See rules for posting.
x
Each brown place in the link takes you to a different article that supports this article...nm
x
Was referring to original link about OOPE.
I did take look at her section about alleged McCain attack, where Obama was contrasting his tax policy to McCain's and simply stated the truth. This is not attack. It is a statement of the obvious.
Malkin is the poster child for PMS, trite and petty. That's what makes her articles so easy to overlook.
Where does it say that in the original post?
Please read the post again, and show me where it says that I am sick of hearing about anything.
The original post was about the judiciary...
committee wanting to talk to Scott McClellan about the Plame case and whether or not perjury or obstruction of justice happened. There is all kind of crap rolling around out there, but what the judiciary committee is looking at that had everyone so excited is about the Plame case and nothing else. THAT was my point and that is what the thread was about.
You are the one who made the innocent until proven guilty comment. And now you have to backpedal because you don't actually believe nor adhere to what you yourself posted. That is the truth, and if that is nasty, so be it.
Well, I don't know how you define morality,piglet. You will have to tell me. Being for the law and innocent until proven guilty for only people who espouse your beliefs...in my book that does not equal particularly high moral values. My opinion, just as it is yours to call me nasty. As if you have never been nasty. But I digress.
And like I said...over and over again. IF and when either of them is impeached, and if they are proven guilty, I will be the first to say they should be removed from office...as I have said over and over today. We all know because we witnessed it that Clinton did the crime. Just because the Congress did not have the guts to convict does not make him any less guilty. If they impeach Cheney and I see evidence that convinces me he is guilty I will say so whether or not Congress has the guts to. Again...difference betweenou and me.
They can list charge after charge after charge. Until they prove it, they are innocent, according to your own post (which you don't believe across the board, but I do).
So we will wait and see. And I still say that the reason Pelosi and the hierarchy are against is because they don't want to open Pandora's box. At that point they will not be able to control what comes out. Give me another good reason why, if she really felt like they were guilty, she would not go forward with impeachment.
Actually, it was your own typo in your original post...nm
nm
What the original post stated
is that one of the issues that should be foremost on people's minds is why did we go to war with Iraq after 9/11 when Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11? At the time the Bush administration linked Iraq to 9/11 as justification for going to war with them. He lied. He knew the people of this Country were vulnerable after 9/11 and he used that vulnerability. Look at what his lie has cost us. Not only should the people in this Country be outraged, they should be asking why.
John McCain supported this war, as did many others at the time. Barack Obama did not. He knew the facts, understood the situation and made the right choice, though it wasn't a popular one at the time. Why didn't John McCain?
Read Bob Woodward's books. He got his information directly from interviews with Bush and his admininstration. Remember the 9/11 Commission Report? These are not opinions - they are facts.
People are being diverted from the issues for a reason. John McCain doesn't want people to think about his lack of sound judgment at such a crucial time.
I did not post the original comment -
and I do not feel that way. I was on the fence myself about which way to go until McCain picked Palin. That toppled me right off...
I was speaking of the original post
My response was to the original post.
As to the Palin thing (no where does it mention McCain, who was also implicated in the original post), did they expect the campaign to make no references to O's shady past? Maybe they should have handled him with kid gloves, like the media did. If O can't handle the scrutiny, maybe he shouldn't have run for office.
Part of the original post by Anon.
If memory serves, the poster did advocate looting and was encouraging it.
My source was cited in the original post
I'm not being presumptuous because I don't assume anything. What I am waiting for is the debates. I want to see how they all equal against each other.
so, just like I thought, the original post was pointless!
nm
I didn't post the original message
just love how people don't post facts, whether McCain or Obama supporter.
FYI - her original post didn't contain *****, it was changed
x
you missed the point of the original post
The supreme court has not ordered him to produce the original; they are simply reviewing the lower court's ruling regarding Berg bringing the suit in the first place. There is no order to produce the document. This is simply a measure that Berg and the other attorneys requesting the writ are now hoping will bring pressure on the electors to force them to demand the document be presented. But at this point there is no order to produce.
The original post was about Bush not Clinton.
Bush is the one who is trying to claim that he has kept the United States safe from terrorist attacks, not Bill Clinton. You are right about one thing. I cannot stand George W. Bush. He he has been an embarrassment to the United States, destroyed our economy, and sullied our reputation throughout the world.
I picked up the quack word from the original post.
No double standard here...unless only Obama detractors are allow to use the quack word. Since you have a hard time talking about more than one thing at a time, let's not divert our attention to include the third subject of homosexual marriage, OK...just keep it simple so you can keep up.
The price of shampoo or McDonalds WAS NOT my original post at all.....sm
Wow, someone tries to come up with a viable solution to just one of our myriad of economic problems in this country, something that will work in the long haul, and we cannot have an intelligent,respectful discusion, sharing ideas and thinking aloud? When all anyone can contribute is insults, put-downs, etc., this board starts to look like worse than the floor of Congress, and these days that is saying a lot. What we have been doing in this country has OBVIOUSLY not been working, has it? So perhaps new persepctives would work. I am not new. the minimum wage battle has been going on forever. If no one can see that giving workers a fairer wage, an incesntive to work hard, pay into the tax system federal and state, become consumeers of good, housing, etc., if you think that one-shot tax refunds are the answer, you are sadly wrong, because that has been the status quo for years and has led us into this giant hole. I am just saying, when it is more profitable for someone to be on welfare and foodstamps than to work what we now have as pitiful minimum wages that WILL NO LONGER in today's economy feed, cloth, and shelter a family today adequately, then I believe an overhaul and new solutions might be in order. And the shampoo thing was a metaphor, if you can understand THAT concept. When you are keeping a household of five going, on a budget, in the North East, and not surviving on credit and borrowing, loans, etc., but truly working for it, and putting kids through college as you go (even state colleges), it is tough, we pay our bills on time, don't get behind, are trying to teach our kids fiscal responsibility, and live within our means and our budget. Bully for your vacations and restaurant meals, it is a luxury for us, and I am not ashamed to say it but proud....perhaps we are relatively poor according to you, but we are honest, hard working, don't owe anyone, and we are rich in family and friends. Guess it is your prespective, dear.
The price of shampoo or McDonalds WAS NOT my original post at all.....sm
Wow, someone tries to come up with a viable solution to just one of our myriad of economic problems in this country, something that will work in the long haul, and we cannot have an intelligent,respectful discusion, sharing ideas and thinking aloud? When all anyone can contribute is insults, put-downs, etc., this board starts to look like worse than the floor of Congress, and these days that is saying a lot. What we have been doing in this country has OBVIOUSLY not been working, has it? So perhaps new persepctives would work. I am not new. the minimum wage battle has been going on forever. If no one can see that giving workers a fairer wage, an incesntive to work hard, pay into the tax system federal and state, become consumeers of good, housing, etc., if you think that one-shot tax refunds are the answer, you are sadly wrong, because that has been the status quo for years and has led us into this giant hole. I am just saying, when it is more profitable for someone to be on welfare and foodstamps than to work what we now have as pitiful minimum wages that WILL NO LONGER in today's economy feed, cloth, and shelter a family today adequately, then I believe an overhaul and new solutions might be in order. And the shampoo thing was a metaphor, if you can understand THAT concept. When you are keeping a household of five going, on a budget, in the North East, and not surviving on credit and borrowing, loans, etc., but truly working for it, and putting kids through college as you go (even state colleges), it is tough, we pay our bills on time, don't get behind, are trying to teach our kids fiscal responsibility, and live within our means and our budget. Bully for your vacations and restaurant meals, it is a luxury for us, and I am not ashamed to say it but proud....perhaps we are relatively poor according to you, but we are honest, hard working, don't owe anyone, and we are rich in family and friends. Guess it is your prespective, dear.
Link to article
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002765299
It was link to a news article
It was not just a vulgar hand gesture, which I might add was shown on NBC, CBS, ABC a few weeks ago ala Bush when he was leaving a meeting with reporters. It was an article about Bush's vulgar personality.
This link went to a 2003 article....
5 years ago....not sure what you want to talk about?
Original pledge by forefathers didn't include God. I agree with keeping the original.
http://www.usflag.org/history/pledgeofallegiance.html
The original Pledge of Allegiance
I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands- one nation indivisible-with liberty and justice for all.
On September 8,1892, the Boston based The Youth's Companion magazine published a few words for students to repeat on Columbus Day that year. Written by Francis Bellamy,the circulation manager and native of Rome, New York, and reprinted on thousands of leaflets, was sent out to public schools across the country. On October 12, 1892, the quadricentennial of Columbus' arrival, more than 12 million children recited the Pledge of Allegiance, thus beginning a required school-day ritual.
At the first National Flag Conference in Washington D.C., on June14, 1923, a change was made. For clarity, the words the Flag of the United States replaced my flag. In the following years various other changes were suggested but were never formally adopted.
It was not until 1942 that Congress officially recognized the Pledge of Allegiance. One year later, in June 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that school children could not be forced to recite it. In fact,today only half of our fifty states have laws that encourage the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom!
In June of 1954 an amendment was made to add the words under God. Then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower said In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America's heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country's most powerful resource in peace and war.
P.S. Please scroll down after reading above post. Washington Post article included.
Reprinted in Boston Globe. Sorry!
Interesting article see link inside
Looks like the feminists are supporting Palin. Very interesting article and it explains why they are supporting her.
http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/09/06/palin-punditry-you-wont-see-in-the-papers-or-on-the-tv-news/
Good article - link inside.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/sep/10/women.uselections2008
Here is the link to an article about Palin and her friends.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?em
See link to article from Women's News inside.
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2046/context/archive
GOPs are gaining - excellent article - see link
Excellent article by D. Morris (who used to be an adviser to Clinton). He hits it right on the head with his assessments. 1.) Obama's poll numbers are not changing but McCain is gaining. 2.) End of July voters trusted the dems to better handle the economy by 11%, now they only trust them by 4%. 3.) Before the convention voters trusted dems to achieve energy independence by 8 points, now it's only a 2 point lead. 4.) When asked who made the smarter VP choice voters said McCain did 50 - 40%.
Key to her popularity is that she understands the average persons problems. Of the question which of the 4 candidates understands the problems of day to day life in America Palin finished first with 33%, Obama second with 32%, McCain with 17, and Biden with 10.
Worst news for Obama is when voters asked who they would consult for advise with the "toughest decision of your life" voters chose McCain over Obama 50-34.
I've been saying all along the Republicans are sweeping the nation. People are seeing through Barack's lies and false hopes. Link to the article is below so you can read for yourselves.
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2008/09/15/gops-gaining/
I hear this too. Here is a link, but I put the article inside. www.OneNewsNow.com
Obama has aunt living in US illegally
Eileen Sullivan and Elliot Spagat - Associated Press Writers - 11/1/2008 6:55:00 AM
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.
Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a U.S. immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late Friday. This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case.
Information about the deportation case was disclosed and confirmed by two separate sources, one of them a federal law enforcement official. The information they made available is known to officials in the federal government, but the AP could not establish whether anyone at a political level in the Bush administration or in the McCain campaign had been involved in its release.
Onyango's refusal to leave the country would represent an administrative, non-criminal violation of U.S. immigration law, meaning such cases are handled outside the criminal court system. Estimates vary, but many experts believe there are more than 10 million such immigrants in the United States.
The AP could not reach Onyango immediately for comment. No one answered the telephone number listed in her name late Friday. It was unclear why her request for asylum was rejected in 2004. The Obama campaign declined to comment late Friday night.
Onyango is not a relative whom Obama has discussed in campaign appearances and, unlike Obama's father and grandmother, is not someone who has been part of the public discussion about his personal life.
A spokeswoman for U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, Kelly Nantel, said the government does not comment on an individual's citizenship status or immigration case.
Onyango's case - coming to light just days before the presidential election - led to an unusual nationwide directive within Immigrations and Customs Enforcement requiring any deportations prior to Tuesday's election to be approved at least at the level of ICE regional directors, the U.S. law enforcement official told the AP.
The unusual directive suggests that the Bush administration is sensitive to the political implications of Onyango's case coming to light so close to the election.
Kenya is in eastern Africa between Somalia and Tanzania. The country has been fractured in violence in recent years, including a period of two months of bloodshed after December 2007 that killed 1,500 people.
The disclosure about Onyango came just one day after Obama's presidential campaign confirmed to the Times of London that Onyango, who has lived in public housing in South Boston for five years, was Obama's half aunt on his father's side.
It was not immediately clear how Onyango might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order.
Don't think you read the same article, THAT IS THE TITLE...see the link I posted...
xx
Link to photo and accompanying portion of article
The photo didn't come through, but the link is below. Also, as you can see from the way the article begins, there was no "liberal" involved in the word "spooked." That was pure Republican (if there is such a thing.)
http://blogs.nashvillescene.com/pitw/2009/06/republican_staffer_e-mails_oba.php
From the beginning of the article:
The picture you're looking at on the right was allegedly sent from Sherri Goforth, research analyst executive assistant for Sen. Diane Black, on May 28 via e-mail, under the headline "Historical Keepsake Photo." "We've never seen President Obama in person, but we're pretty sure those pair of spooked white eyes against a black background don't quite do him justice. In fact, one could argue that forwarding an e-mail like this to 20 of your friends makes you look like an out-and-out bigot."
"... forwarding an e-mail like this to 20 of your friends makes you look like an out-and-out bigot." Yeah. Wink, wink.
Post the direct link. I don't see the post you're referring to.
t
I posted the entire article, but I MUST be LYING! LOL! Link inside. sm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/30/230457.shtml
That's a good, fair article. Very well stated. Thanks for posting the link!....nm
Psychiatry Ponders Whether Extreme Bias Can Be an Illness...see article/link
Psychiatry Ponders Whether Extreme Bias Can Be an Illness
By Shankar Vedantam Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 10, 2005; Page A01
The 48-year-old man turned down a job because he feared that a co-worker would be gay. He was upset that gay culture was becoming mainstream and blamed most of his personal, professional and emotional problems on the gay and lesbian movement.
These fixations preoccupied him every day. Articles in magazines about gays made him agitated. He confessed that his fears had left him socially isolated and unemployed for years: A recovering alcoholic, the man even avoided 12-step meetings out of fear he might encounter a gay person.
He had a fixed delusion about the world, said Sondra E. Solomon, a psychologist at the University of Vermont who treated the man for two years. He felt under attack, he felt threatened.
Mental health practitioners say they regularly confront extreme forms of racism, homophobia and other prejudice in the course of therapy, and that some patients are disabled by these beliefs. As doctors increasingly weigh the effects of race and culture on mental illness, some are asking whether pathological bias ought to be an official psychiatric diagnosis.
Forgot to post a link in 1st post. Sorry.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
I was going to post that article too
That was a very good article. Is this the scenario you are talking about?
One scenario will suffice: On some Monday not so far in the future, “President” Obama meets with the Joint Chiefs of Staff to announce that “Operation Sandblaster,” for a massive nuclear attack on Iran’s supposed “weapons of mass destruction," will be launched on the coming Friday. The Joint Chiefs remonstrate, pointing out that such aggression will trigger retaliation by Russia and China, almost surely plunging the whole world into a thermonuclear World War III. “President” Obama, however, is adamant, and instructs the Joint Chiefs to have the necessary orders for “Sandblaster”—or their resignations—on his desk by Wednesday morning. Knowing that, if they resign, “President” Obama will simply appoint some unprincipled uniformed “yes men” to carry out his plan, the Joint Chiefs immediately order covert break-ins around the country to obtain his original birth certificate and other material evidence relating to his ineligibility for the Office of President. With these documents in hand, on Wednesday morning, accompanied by a contingent of heavily armed Marines, the Joint Chiefs confront “President” Obama with the evidence, arrest him as an usurper and all the Members of Congress as his co-conspirators, and appoint themselves a Military Commission to function as a “caretaker government” during the ensuing “national emergency.”
I actually didn't post the article because it's long and I knew I'd get the O'worshippers/lovers to come back with some bull-oney comeback like it was too long, or ho hum, or whatever (oh, or the standard "not credible, is a right-wing, etc, etc). But for those interested, here is the link.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin186.htm
Here is article, it disappeared from the above post.
Before 9/11 the Federal Emergency Management Agency listed the three most likely catastrophic disasters facing America: a terrorist attack on New York, a major earthquake in San Francisco and a hurricane strike on New Orleans. The New Orleans hurricane scenario, The Houston Chronicle wrote in December 2001, may be the deadliest of all. It described a potential catastrophe very much like the one now happening.
So why were New Orleans and the nation so unprepared? After 9/11, hard questions were deferred in the name of national unity, then buried under a thick coat of whitewash. This time, we need accountability.
First question: Why have aid and security taken so long to arrive? Katrina hit five days ago - and it was already clear by last Friday that Katrina could do immense damage along the Gulf Coast. Yet the response you'd expect from an advanced country never happened. Thousands of Americans are dead or dying, not because they refused to evacuate, but because they were too poor or too sick to get out without help - and help wasn't provided. Many have yet to receive any help at all.
There will and should be many questions about the response of state and local governments; in particular, couldn't they have done more to help the poor and sick escape? But the evidence points, above all, to a stunning lack of both preparation and urgency in the federal government's response.
Even military resources in the right place weren't ordered into action. On Wednesday, said an editorial in The Sun Herald in Biloxi, Miss., reporters listening to horrific stories of death and survival at the Biloxi Junior High School shelter looked north across Irish Hill Road and saw Air Force personnel playing basketball and performing calisthenics. Playing basketball and performing calisthenics!
Maybe administration officials believed that the local National Guard could keep order and deliver relief. But many members of the National Guard and much of its equipment - including high-water vehicles - are in Iraq. The National Guard needs that equipment back home to support the homeland security mission, a Louisiana Guard officer told reporters several weeks ago.
Second question: Why wasn't more preventive action taken? After 2003 the Army Corps of Engineers sharply slowed its flood-control work, including work on sinking levees. The corps, an Editor and Publisher article says, citing a series of articles in The Times-Picayune in New Orleans, never tried to hide the fact that the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security - coming at the same time as federal tax cuts - was the reason for the strain.
In 2002 the corps' chief resigned, reportedly under threat of being fired, after he criticized the administration's proposed cuts in the corps' budget, including flood-control spending.
Third question: Did the Bush administration destroy FEMA's effectiveness? The administration has, by all accounts, treated the emergency management agency like an unwanted stepchild, leading to a mass exodus of experienced professionals.
Last year James Lee Witt, who won bipartisan praise for his leadership of the agency during the Clinton years, said at a Congressional hearing: I am extremely concerned that the ability of our nation to prepare for and respond to disasters has been sharply eroded. I hear from emergency managers, local and state leaders, and first responders nearly every day that the FEMA they knew and worked well with has now disappeared.
I don't think this is a simple tale of incompetence. The reason the military wasn't rushed in to help along the Gulf Coast is, I believe, the same reason nothing was done to stop looting after the fall of Baghdad. Flood control was neglected for the same reason our troops in Iraq didn't get adequate armor.
At a fundamental level, I'd argue, our current leaders just aren't serious about some of the essential functions of government. They like waging war, but they don't like providing security, rescuing those in need or spending on preventive measures. And they never, ever ask for shared sacrifice.
Yesterday Mr. Bush made an utterly fantastic claim: that nobody expected the breach of the levees. In fact, there had been repeated warnings about exactly that risk.
So America, once famous for its can-do attitude, now has a can't-do government that makes excuses instead of doing its job. And while it makes those excuses, Americans are dying.
© 2005 New York Times
###
Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
You post an article. How typical.
I DON'T CARE about your articles. This isn't ABOUT articles. Many of us have someone there. By all means, don't step outside that box. Don't make a life better. And by all means NEVER EVER THINK OF ANYONE BUT YOURSELF. I don't want to hear your personal stories. As far as I am concerned, those soldiers over there are everyone's son, everyone's daughter.
Re-post the rest of the article....sm
people at the restaurant says he didn't watch it.
A host at the restaurant tells CBS News' that the President-elect stopped by the only television in the high end establishment, a small screen at the bar, and watched for "a minute or two." The source said he did not notice what Mr. Obama was watching but that "no" it was not for an extended period of time.
Read the article before you post.
x
No need to post a link. I believe you. SM
I just wanted to know.
Hey, post the link gt....nm
x
Can you post a link?
I've somehow missed this one. Thanks!
Sorry, just had to post this link
This is why people are voting for the O.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=381gFG4Crr8
So you post a link you don't believe
And you expect no one to comment on that? Really?
Show me the post. Link please. sm
We may have in the past, but not lately, Teddy. Lies? Gosh, you like that word. A lie is an untruth. You just ordered someone from the board. That is a board moderator's job, not yours. Hardly a lie. A factual observation I would say.
|
